Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Jonathan Kirwan on 10 Oct 2006 14:19 On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 07:10:21 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 05:05:26 GMT, Jonathan Kirwan ><jkirwan(a)easystreet.com> wrote: > >>The Hamilton Amendment is Amendment 9, not 4. Read it. > >Of course I've read it. What's your intrepretation as regards privacy >in, say, international communications? I wasn't addressing that part of the discussion, but your quite specific comment that was, "The current concept of privacy as a Constitutional right was cobbled up by the Supremes to justify the Roe-v-Wade thing." This is not at all true. Not even close. By the way, have you bothered to read that decision? Jon P.S. I'm particularly interested in the period shortly before the formation of the US. I have one set of only 7000 volume sets printed by the US on the subject (3 volumes initially, two more shortly afterwards.) It was produced by order of a Senate resolution on January 24th, 1901, with the House concurring on February 9th, 1901. The volumes are titled, "Documentary History of the Constitution of the United States of America." In the first volume alone, it provides the proceedings of the Annapolis Convention; the proceedings of the Continental Congress; the credentials of the delegates to the Federal Convention; the proceedings of the Federal Convention (including detailed, daily records of the voting history for each colony/state) and much more. I read these, page by page, when I have the time. I am also personally reproducing a two-volume, five-book set by George Bancroft on the web. It is copyrighted in 1882 and called "History of the Formation of the Constitution of the United States of America." It's referenced in some US Supreme Court decisions. The author personally visited and thoroughly read through many of the letters exchanged by the principles at the time and it's an excellent reference. I've learned a few things that go against some of the presumptions taught in typical history classes, reading through it.
From: John Larkin on 10 Oct 2006 14:49 On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:11:04 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >You make more mistakes simply because Americans are sloppy about everything. > >Graham Everything? ICs? Jet aircraft? Agriculture? Electronics design? John
From: Michael A. Terrell on 10 Oct 2006 14:59 John Larkin wrote: > > On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:11:04 +0100, Eeyore > <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > >You make more mistakes simply because Americans are sloppy about everything. > > > >Graham > > Everything? ICs? Jet aircraft? Agriculture? Electronics design? > > John No, just letting British trolls on usenet. -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida
From: T Wake on 10 Oct 2006 15:04 "John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message news:hlqni2t1b12h5dcmvk7n8r5f9gmk680agq(a)4ax.com... > On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:11:04 +0100, Eeyore > <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >>You make more mistakes simply because Americans are sloppy about >>everything. >> >>Graham > > Everything? ICs? Jet aircraft? Agriculture? Electronics design? Yeah, pretty much..... :-)
From: T Wake on 10 Oct 2006 15:04
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:452BED9D.6573EB54(a)earthlink.net... > John Larkin wrote: >> >> On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:11:04 +0100, Eeyore >> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >You make more mistakes simply because Americans are sloppy about >> >everything. >> > >> >Graham >> >> Everything? ICs? Jet aircraft? Agriculture? Electronics design? >> >> John > > > No, just letting British trolls on usenet. Better than boring American trolls. |